33 Replies Latest reply: Oct 26, 2011 7:55 AM by atiredoldguy RSS

Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff

trialstardragon
None of the guns in the game are over powered, just as none are underpowered.

None of the guns in the game need to be nerfed, just as none of them need to be buffed.

They work as they do because that is what the developers (those that made the game) decided on how they should work. Not how you the players (those that did not make the game) want them to work just to make you happy and feel the game is fair and balanced.

Do not like it? Then do not play it any more, or learn to change your play style and improve your skills from how you played the other fps games like mw2/halo3/bfbc2 instead of think the game should be changed to fit you instead.

The developers made the game they way they felt it would be fun, not for how each of you think it would be fun. So get over it and yourself and just play the game like it is.

Still do not like it? Fine go to school learn to make games start up your own game development company and make your own game with your own rules on how you want it to be played and think is fun. Hmm... sort of what the developers of this game did eh? And see if you too do not get entitlement minded individuals coming to your forums trying to tell you how to make your game better because it was not what they wanted or liked and then see how you think and feel about it.

Way to many players cry way to much about things being Op or Up or unbalanced in this game and forget that they do not get to make the rules on how this game is meant to be played. They bought a product form a company, that does not exactly give them the rights to cry and demand that things be changed just to suit them individually when others use the same product too and may not like those changes.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    creaper21
    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    davidlsofferman.

    creaper210 wrote:

     

    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.


    When did they patch the Famas?
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    trialstardragon

    davidlsofferman. wrote:

     

    creaper210 wrote:

     

    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.


    When did they patch the Famas?


    The changed the famas months ago. It has been nerfed allready.

    And as towards the snipers... they caved into the qs crybabies that could not qs as easily before so left the game. They only patched the snipers to try and bring back some of players. A mistake, they should never had made. But again since this is a company and they do think about their bottom line they changed it from what it was. Which was far better then what it is now.

    But regardless they will never make all the other guns fit and be the way like everyone complains. Because as a company they are also smart enough to known they can not make everyone happy and nor should they try too. Because no matter what they do others will complain about what they did and want it back to how it was, or different yet again.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    Lionel,

    creaper210 wrote:

     

    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.



    OWNED
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    IRISH_THA_3RD
    I agree 100%.

    If they want to play their game, they need to make it.Also, the "underpowered guns" arent even underpowered. they are actually really good. I even use the uzi competitavely.If they cry that a famas killed them, yes, it is low on recoil, but its still their fault for stiking their head out of cover. You duck, regenerate your health, pop out, and kill him. Its not that hard to beat a famas user. And this stratagy goes for other guns to. not just the famas.

  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    IRISH_THA_3RD wrote:

     

    I agree 100%.

    If they want to play their game, they need to make it.Also, the "underpowered guns" arent even underpowered. they are actually really good. I even use the uzi competitavely.If they cry that a famas killed them, yes, it is low on recoil, but its still their fault for stiking their head out of cover. You duck, regenerate your health, pop out, and kill him. Its not that hard to beat a famas user. And this stratagy goes for other guns to. not just the famas.


    shhhhhh dont bring skill into it... they are listening... speaking of skill is punishable by death! I think they may have heard you... Quick into the escape tunnel before the witch hunt begins!
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    davidlsofferman.

    Lionel, wrote:

     

    creaper210 wrote:

     

    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.



    OWNED


    X2
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    asasa
    Really? Because I'm pretty sure the developers want a balanced game. Now, that doesnt give you the right to redefine balance to, "Whatever we were given is balance". They want the same balance that we want. Unfortunately, they are incompetent.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy

    davidlsofferman. wrote:

     

    Lionel, wrote:

     

    creaper210 wrote:

     

    Well, they already patched snipers, the AK-74u, and the Famas. So it's obviously not as the developers intended otherwise they wouldn't have changed it. And obviously this "whining" actually does something since we got that.



    OWNED


    X2




    I guess you all must be right.

    They patched the famas, the ak74u and the snipers.

    Now you are all happy with them.......... eh?
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy

    asasa wrote:

     

    Really? Because I'm pretty sure the developers want a balanced game. Now, that doesnt give you the right to redefine balance to, "Whatever we were given is balance". They want the same balance that we want. Unfortunately, they are incompetent.




    They make the bucks while you sit there and yap about it.

    I always thought incompetence meant something else.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    trialstardragon

    asasa wrote:

     

    Really? Because I'm pretty sure the developers want a balanced game. Now, that doesnt give you the right to redefine balance to, "Whatever we were given is balance". They want the same balance that we want. Unfortunately, they are incompetent.


    No they do not want the same thing as every other player that plays the game wants. They want what they want plain and simple. They created the game, it is their right to decide what balance for the game is not the players. They decide the rules not the players, they decide what is right or fair, not the players. Get where I am going yet? Probably not, because everyone that whines about the guns being unbalanced will never understand.

    Jeez there is so many entitlement minded people who play this game that think just because they bought the game they ought to have it play by what they think is fair or balanced, or equal or right or fun.... wow people are so stupid sometimes. Just because you buy something does not mean you always own it and get to have it do what you want, how you want, why you want, when you want all the time.

    No two peoples view of balance will ever be the same, so no the developers can not ever give you what you want in the game. Everyone can not have their own perfect game where it is balanced to their preference. For what you may call balanced I may call gimped, nerfed, simplified, weakened. What I call balanced you may call buffed, over powered, unbalanced, unfair. Get it yet? Probably not... and probably never will. You will always just go and whine when a gun does not work the way you think it should based upon how it worked in another game.

    Big hint for all of you, do not expect the guns in this game to be or act the same as any other game that has the guns in them in any form. The developers have creative lisence which allows them to tweak any part of the gun to fit what they decide is right for the game they are making. They do not need to make the perform the same, act the same, sound the same, look the same, work the same, be balanced the same. Just because you think they should, does not mean they have too.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    ghosthound
    Core is not the place to judge whether a weapon is underpowered or overpowered.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    davidlsofferman.

    GhostHound wrote:

     

    Core is not the place to judge whether a weapon is underpowered or overpowered.


    Why?
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    Snipingdbag
    Your thread is a “hey 3arch take me up the ass” thread, that or it makes no sense at all. Here you are saying guns are not created equal, yet you refuse to believe there is a balance issue with the FamasAug or the fact that nobody uses smgs other than mp5k and mainly the 74u with rf / grip, let alone shotguns other than a silenced spaz, simply because 3arch made the game, how fckin stupid can you be? There can be diversity and balance. Both are not present in blops. There is the issue. That and the hit register / retarded lag compensation / SC glitching / dashing that happens daily and ruins a potentially superb game. Let me say that I rather they fix the last issues I addressed than clones / gun balance & diversity issues.

    The devs do try to listen to us their main source of an income / job, otherwise they wouldn't have done all those patches and tweaks to the guns & game all-round. They create the game for us, so they should listen to consumer / community feedback if they want to them to be happy & comeback for more (next game, map packs), that includes weapon / game balance. Also the more people play the game online, the more money they are making off the game.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    trialstardragon

    Snipingdbag wrote:

     

    Your thread is a “hey 3arch take me up the ass” thread, that or it makes no sense at all. Here you are saying guns are not created equal, yet you refuse to believe there is a balance issue with the FamasAug or the fact that nobody uses smgs other than mp5k and mainly the 74u with rf / grip, let alone shotguns other than a silenced spaz, simply because 3arch made the game, how fckin stupid can you be? There can be diversity and balance. Both are not present in blops. There is the issue. That and the hit register / retarded lag compensation / SC glitching / dashing that happens daily and ruins a potentially superb game. Let me say that I rather they fix the last issues I addressed than clones / gun balance & diversity issues.

    The devs do try to listen to us their main source of an income / job, otherwise they wouldn't have done all those patches and tweaks to the guns & game all-round. They create the game for us, so they should listen to consumer / community feedback if they want to them to be happy & comeback for more (next game, map packs), that includes weapon / game balance. Also the more people play the game online, the more money they are making off the game.



    There is diversity in the game and balance in the game. Not everyone use's the famas or aug every match, not everyone uses the ak74u every match. The famas and aug are not OP and never were. Just to many people cry too much because they die to it. And if you die to it enough times you begin to cry and think it must be op and needs to be nerfed. I can go in to any match and see at least 5-6 different guns being used almost ever game I go into on both teams.  The lag compensation is in all fps console games. Just you did not have theater to show it working as much as before. Since none of the other cod's had theater to show the desync issue like bo does. Even mw2 has lag issues just as bad as BO does. Just everyone got used to them and did not ever have a way to try and show it to others before.

    I guess you never listened to any of the dev talks before, they created the game how they wanted it to be for themself with hopes that the players would like it. It was not first and foremost created for the players first. They can not listen to every Tom **** and Larry that complains about something not being fair. They can not change everything just to make a few happier with out risking making more players unhappy instead. Look at all the problems that happened with the hardcore changes they tried.

    And as I have said before, as long as there is more then one gun in any class, and more then one attachment and more then one perk, they can not balance them all against each other as some of you may want them to or think they should. It is not feasible or really even possible. There is too many variables to take into consideration. It is not nearly as simple as you or others wish to think it should be. If it was they would have done it, or they would have hired you and your expertise at what should be balanced to make the game fair and fun and had you do it.

    People do use more then mp5k or the ak74u. I see the kiparis being used all the time. I see the pm63 being used, the mpl being used, the uzi being used, the scorpions being used quite a lot. Just because you do not all the time does not mean they are not being used.

    I have seen the steakout used, the olypmia used just as much as the spaz. So yes the other shotguns do get used again your statment is fail.

    I have seen every ar in the game used by different players in different matches, so yes they do get used.

    I have see every sniper in the game used by different players, so yes they do get used.

    Just because you do not see it as much as you think you should does not mean they are not getting used.

    Dashing can not be stopped. the dasboard feature and sign out feature are ms controlled not 3arc. They have no control over if a player choses to do so or not and no fps developer ever will. It is ms xbox feature controlled only by ms. And they are not going to use dedi servers just to stop that one problem. Because dedi servers have a host of other problems that make them even harder to maintain then most players understand.

    And futhermore stop whining about some silly stats in a game, and just play it for fun and not worry if someone dashes and your oh so special noscope shot did not get saved...
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    TrialStarDragon wrote:

     

    Snipingdbag wrote:

     

    Your thread is a “hey 3arch take me up the ass” thread, that or it makes no sense at all. Here you are saying guns are not created equal, yet you refuse to believe there is a balance issue with the FamasAug or the fact that nobody uses smgs other than mp5k and mainly the 74u with rf / grip, let alone shotguns other than a silenced spaz, simply because 3arch made the game, how fckin stupid can you be? There can be diversity and balance. Both are not present in blops. There is the issue. That and the hit register / retarded lag compensation / SC glitching / dashing that happens daily and ruins a potentially superb game. Let me say that I rather they fix the last issues I addressed than clones / gun balance & diversity issues.

    The devs do try to listen to us their main source of an income / job, otherwise they wouldn't have done all those patches and tweaks to the guns & game all-round. They create the game for us, so they should listen to consumer / community feedback if they want to them to be happy & comeback for more (next game, map packs), that includes weapon / game balance. Also the more people play the game online, the more money they are making off the game.



    There is diversity in the game and balance in the game. Not everyone use's the famas or aug every match, not everyone uses the ak74u every match. The famas and aug are not OP and never were. Just to many people cry too much because they die to it. And if you die to it enough times you begin to cry and think it must be op and needs to be nerfed. I can go in to any match and see at least 5-6 different guns being used almost ever game I go into on both teams.  The lag compensation is in all fps console games. Just you did not have theater to show it working as much as before. Since none of the other cod's had theater to show the desync issue like bo does. Even mw2 has lag issues just as bad as BO does. Just everyone got used to them and did not ever have a way to try and show it to others before.

    I guess you never listened to any of the dev talks before, they created the game how they wanted it to be for themself with hopes that the players would like it. It was not first and foremost created for the players first. They can not listen to every Tom **** and Larry that complains about something not being fair. They can not change everything just to make a few happier with out risking making more players unhappy instead. Look at all the problems that happened with the hardcore changes they tried.

    And as I have said before, as long as there is more then one gun in any class, and more then one attachment and more then one perk, they can not balance them all against each other as some of you may want them to or think they should. It is not feasible or really even possible. There is too many variables to take into consideration. It is not nearly as simple as you or others wish to think it should be. If it was they would have done it, or they would have hired you and your expertise at what should be balanced to make the game fair and fun and had you do it.

    People do use more then mp5k or the ak74u. I see the kiparis being used all the time. I see the pm63 being used, the mpl being used, the uzi being used, the scorpions being used quite a lot. Just because you do not all the time does not mean they are not being used.

    I have seen the steakout used, the olypmia used just as much as the spaz. So yes the other shotguns do get used again your statment is fail.

    I have seen every ar in the game used by different players in different matches, so yes they do get used.

    I have see every sniper in the game used by different players, so yes they do get used.

    Just because you do not see it as much as you think you should does not mean they are not getting used.

    Dashing can not be stopped. the dasboard feature and sign out feature are ms controlled not 3arc. They have no control over if a player choses to do so or not and no fps developer ever will. It is ms xbox feature controlled only by ms. And they are not going to use dedi servers just to stop that one problem. Because dedi servers have a host of other problems that make them even harder to maintain then most players understand.

    And futhermore stop whining about some silly stats in a game, and just play it for fun and not worry if someone dashes and your oh so special noscope shot did not get saved...



    I actually have a problem with the host dropping due to dashboarders. The first 3 times we crawled the flag, all the way from their base back to ours, the host rage quit and we lost our flag ninja epicness >.<
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff

    deamonomic wrote:

     

    IRISH_THA_3RD wrote:

     

    I agree 100%.

    If they want to play their game, they need to make it.Also, the "underpowered guns" arent even underpowered. they are actually really good. I even use the uzi competitavely.If they cry that a famas killed them, yes, it is low on recoil, but its still their fault for stiking their head out of cover. You duck, regenerate your health, pop out, and kill him. Its not that hard to beat a famas user. And this stratagy goes for other guns to. not just the famas.


    shhhhhh dont bring skill into it... they are listening... speaking of skill is punishable by death! I think they may have heard you... Quick into the escape tunnel before the witch hunt begins!



    @ deamonomic: Lol, I second that. What's your GT btw? Seen you on the forums quite a bit. Seem to be a good but laid back player. Plus I want in on your ninja flag epicness.

    On topic: What the first guy said. If I have better accuracy than most players with an MP5 than they do with a FAMAS, then clearly the Mp5 must be the OP gun here since I can kill someone with less bullets. Less bullets = less time = OP gun.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    Ecliptix wrote:

     

    deamonomic wrote:

     

    IRISH_THA_3RD wrote:

     

    I agree 100%.

    If they want to play their game, they need to make it.Also, the "underpowered guns" arent even underpowered. they are actually really good. I even use the uzi competitavely.If they cry that a famas killed them, yes, it is low on recoil, but its still their fault for stiking their head out of cover. You duck, regenerate your health, pop out, and kill him. Its not that hard to beat a famas user. And this stratagy goes for other guns to. not just the famas.


    shhhhhh dont bring skill into it... they are listening... speaking of skill is punishable by death! I think they may have heard you... Quick into the escape tunnel before the witch hunt begins!



    @ deamonomic: Lol, I second that. What's your GT btw? Seen you on the forums quite a bit. Seem to be a good but laid back player. Plus I want in on your ninja flag epicness.

    On topic: What the first guy said. If I have better accuracy than most players with an MP5 than they do with a FAMAS, then clearly the Mp5 must be the OP gun here since I can kill someone with less bullets. Less bullets = less time = OP gun.


    My GT is Deamonomic :P I iz creative right? But I dont play as much right now because im busy doing other stuffs and when I do get on my team drags me off to play some GB matchs :P

    On topic. I was killed yesterday by a guy using the Famas and Slight of hand pro. Repeatedly. Did he kick my ass because of a gun or perk? **** no, he kicked my ass because at the time my aim was horrible (it was a bad day :P) I couldnt nuke the broad side of barn yesterday. As such I died.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy

    deamonomic wrote:

     


    On topic. I was killed yesterday by a guy using the Famas and Slight of hand pro. Repeatedly. Did he kick my ass because of a gun or perk? **** no, he kicked my ass because at the time my aim was horrible (it was a bad day :P) I couldnt nuke the broad side of barn yesterday. As such I died.




    There you go bringing skill into the balance discussion.

    Its NEVER your fault. Period.

    There are times when I get killed over and over by the famas .............. and the galil, ak47,mp5,pm63,hk21,spas, commando,stoner,asp........

    Its funny how some days every weapon is op, and other days none of them are.
    The devs must just be playing jokes on us, or they just cant make up their incompetent minds.They patch them all one day, then unpatch them the next.

    Silly developers!
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    firehawkshooter

    a tired old guy wrote:

     

    Its NEVER your fault. Period.



    Really?

    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly get killed by a sniper when attempting to cross the same street over and over?
    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly attempt to kill the same camper in the same room?
    Is it never my fault when I make a poor tactical decision and get my entire team killed in a tiebreaker round of SnD?
    Is it never my fault when I decide not to go after the objective and making our team lose?
    Is it never my fault when I spoon feed the enemy killstreaks and free victories by doing these things?

    Is it never my fault, but that of others? 
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    firehawkshooter wrote:

     

    a tired old guy wrote:

     

    Its NEVER your fault. Period.



    Really?

    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly get killed by a sniper when attempting to cross the same street over and over?
    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly attempt to kill the same camper in the same room?
    Is it never my fault when I make a poor tactical decision and get my entire team killed in a tiebreaker round of SnD?
    Is it never my fault when I decide not to go after the objective and making our team lose?
    Is it never my fault when I spoon feed the enemy killstreaks and free victories by doing these things?

    Is it never my fault, but that of others? 


    you do realize he was being sarcastic right?
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy

    firehawkshooter wrote:

     

    a tired old guy wrote:

     

    Its NEVER your fault. Period.



    Really?

    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly get killed by a sniper when attempting to cross the same street over and over?
    Is it never my fault when I repeatedly attempt to kill the same camper in the same room?
    Is it never my fault when I make a poor tactical decision and get my entire team killed in a tiebreaker round of SnD?
    Is it never my fault when I decide not to go after the objective and making our team lose?
    Is it never my fault when I spoon feed the enemy killstreaks and free victories by doing these things?

    Is it never my fault, but that of others? 




    Thats correct .

    Never.

    Its all the developers' fault ....... always.

    They created the game with balance issues.


    How else could you explain it ... if i was to kill you or you were to kill me,
    it couldnt be your fault, it couldnt be my fault........... has to be the devs.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    Spur4
    I don't understand why its such a bad thing to ask for more balance in a game. Gun's don't have to be the same to have balance either, so the lack of gun variety argument is null. I.M.O, the more balance a game has, the more likely that gun variety will be high. I'm not a bad player at this game either, I do quite well using a wide variety of playstyles, guns, perks, etc. Its just that when I'm playing with, say, a PM63 I'll do good. But in the back of my mind, I know that I would have done even better with a Famas/Aug.

    Basically, what we have in this game is this;

    ---The best guns---
        +The best choice for playing good, can do everything that other guns can do, but better(Compare: Famas)

    ---The middle class---
        +Has some similar traits with the best guns, but lacks in areas that the best guns still excel in(Compare Famas vs. PM63, PM63 has firerate but lacks damage, aim assist, attachments, mag size etc.)

    ---The worst of the worst---
        +These guns are unintended for regular gameplay, and perform poorly on almost every level.(Compare Famas vs. Uzi, Uzi has more recoil, less damage, less aim assist, attachments, etc.)



    Thankfully, this game isn't unbalanced to the point of being unplayable. It just needs a little tweaking. I don't see the big deal with adding a little more balance to the game, unless you're a person that uses the Famas at all times. I can understand why it might upset someone that "their gun!" is getting nerfed, but it would be for the overall betterment of the game. 
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    asasa

    TrialStarDragon wrote:

     

    asasa wrote:

     

    Really? Because I'm pretty sure the developers want a balanced game. Now, that doesnt give you the right to redefine balance to, "Whatever we were given is balance". They want the same balance that we want. Unfortunately, they are incompetent.


    No they do not want the same thing as every other player that plays the game wants. They want what they want plain and simple. They created the game, it is their right to decide what balance for the game is not the players. They decide the rules not the players, they decide what is right or fair, not the players. Get where I am going yet? Probably not, because everyone that whines about the guns being unbalanced will never understand.

    Jeez there is so many entitlement minded people who play this game that think just because they bought the game they ought to have it play by what they think is fair or balanced, or equal or right or fun.... wow people are so stupid sometimes. Just because you buy something does not mean you always own it and get to have it do what you want, how you want, why you want, when you want all the time.

    No two peoples view of balance will ever be the same, so no the developers can not ever give you what you want in the game. Everyone can not have their own perfect game where it is balanced to their preference. For what you may call balanced I may call gimped, nerfed, simplified, weakened. What I call balanced you may call buffed, over powered, unbalanced, unfair. Get it yet? Probably not... and probably never will. You will always just go and whine when a gun does not work the way you think it should based upon how it worked in another game.

    Big hint for all of you, do not expect the guns in this game to be or act the same as any other game that has the guns in them in any form. The developers have creative lisence which allows them to tweak any part of the gun to fit what they decide is right for the game they are making. They do not need to make the perform the same, act the same, sound the same, look the same, work the same, be balanced the same. Just because you think they should, does not mean they have too.




    1. They have stated they want a balanced game. This is not balanced. Are you really so stupid that you're going to deny that? I dont give a **** if you dont care if things arent balanced. Fact is, they arent. I didnt decide it was fact. It IS FACT THAT THIS GAME IS HIGHLY IMBALANCED.

    2. Really? Because.. I'm fairly certain this forum is here for community input. Giving input on things, such as, "The Famas is OP" is somehow.. self entitlement? Yeah, I am entitled to a good game if I payed $60 for it. Especially one that is from a series where nothing ever changes. This isnt some revolutionary game, or indie developer. It's a company that makes billions of dollars by changing maps, guns, and adding an attachment every game. That takes a month, tops.

    3. No, because balance isn't something that can have multiple definitions. Balance is in numbers. Numbers dont sway one way or the other. There is right, and there is wrong. This isn't English class.

    4. Point being...?
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy

    asasa wrote:

     

    [
    1. They have stated they want a balanced game. This is not balanced. Are you really so stupid that you're going to deny that? I dont give a **** if you dont care if things arent balanced. Fact is, they arent. I didnt decide it was fact. It IS FACT THAT THIS GAME IS HIGHLY IMBALANCED.


    Seeing as they created it I'm sure they could have made the weapons perform any way they wanted. Since they are the ones who made the weapons peform the way they do ....... it only makes sense its because they wanted it that way. I got an alibi.......... so you cant sugest I stood with a gun pointed at their head to make them the way they are.



    2. Really? Because.. I'm fairly certain this forum is here for community input. Giving input on things, such as, "The Famas is OP" is somehow.. self entitlement? Yeah, I am entitled to a good game if I payed $60 for it. Especially one that is from a series where nothing ever changes. This isnt some revolutionary game, or indie developer. It's a company that makes billions of dollars by changing maps, guns, and adding an attachment every game. That takes a month, tops.


    Yes .... you have an entitlement issue. In your opinion the game isnt balanced ...... you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. If you dislike the game so much ... you are entitled to not play it.. But you are not entitled to force them to make the game just so it suits you. Plenty of people ar satisfied ...... even happy ... the way it is.

    bal·ance (blns)
    n.
    1. A weighing device, especially one consisting of a rigid beam horizontally suspended by a low-friction support at its center, with identical weighing pans hung at either end, one of which holds an unknown weight while the effective weight in the other is increased by known amounts until the beam is level and motionless.
    2. A state of equilibrium or parity characterized by cancellation of all forces by equal opposing forces.
    3. The power or means to decide.
    4.
    a. A state of bodily equilibrium: thrown off balance by a gust of wind.
    b. The ability to maintain bodily equilibrium: Gymnasts must have good balance.
    5. A stable mental or psychological state; emotional stability.
    6. A harmonious or satisfying arrangement or proportion of parts or elements, as in a design. See Synonyms at proportion.
    7. An influence or force tending to produce equilibrium; counterpoise.
    8. The difference in magnitude between opposing forces or influences.
    9. Accounting
    a. Equality of totals in the debit and credit sides of an account.
    b. The difference between such totals, either on the credit or the debit side.
    10. Something that is left over; a remainder.
    11. Chemistry Equality of mass and net electric charge of reacting species on each side of an equation.
    12. Mathematics Equality with respect to the net number of reduced symbolic quantities on each side of an equation.
    13. A balance wheel.

    Read 2, 6, 7, 8,
    None of the definitions suggest numbers . except maybe in accounting and just like english class .. this aint it.

    But even when concerning numbers, you arent taking ALL of them into consideration, only the ones you want to use.. 



    4. Point being...?


    Point being ............. If you dont like it you dont need to play it


  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    trialstardragon

    asasa wrote:

     

    TrialStarDragon wrote:

     

    asasa wrote:

     

    Really? Because I'm pretty sure the developers want a balanced game. Now, that doesnt give you the right to redefine balance to, "Whatever we were given is balance". They want the same balance that we want. Unfortunately, they are incompetent.


    No they do not want the same thing as every other player that plays the game wants. They want what they want plain and simple. They created the game, it is their right to decide what balance for the game is not the players. They decide the rules not the players, they decide what is right or fair, not the players. Get where I am going yet? Probably not, because everyone that whines about the guns being unbalanced will never understand.

    Jeez there is so many entitlement minded people who play this game that think just because they bought the game they ought to have it play by what they think is fair or balanced, or equal or right or fun.... wow people are so stupid sometimes. Just because you buy something does not mean you always own it and get to have it do what you want, how you want, why you want, when you want all the time.

    No two peoples view of balance will ever be the same, so no the developers can not ever give you what you want in the game. Everyone can not have their own perfect game where it is balanced to their preference. For what you may call balanced I may call gimped, nerfed, simplified, weakened. What I call balanced you may call buffed, over powered, unbalanced, unfair. Get it yet? Probably not... and probably never will. You will always just go and whine when a gun does not work the way you think it should based upon how it worked in another game.

    Big hint for all of you, do not expect the guns in this game to be or act the same as any other game that has the guns in them in any form. The developers have creative lisence which allows them to tweak any part of the gun to fit what they decide is right for the game they are making. They do not need to make the perform the same, act the same, sound the same, look the same, work the same, be balanced the same. Just because you think they should, does not mean they have too.




    1. They have stated they want a balanced game. This is not balanced. Are you really so stupid that you're going to deny that? I dont give a **** if you dont care if things arent balanced. Fact is, they arent. I didnt decide it was fact. It IS FACT THAT THIS GAME IS HIGHLY IMBALANCED.

    2. Really? Because.. I'm fairly certain this forum is here for community input. Giving input on things, such as, "The Famas is OP" is somehow.. self entitlement? Yeah, I am entitled to a good game if I payed $60 for it. Especially one that is from a series where nothing ever changes. This isnt some revolutionary game, or indie developer. It's a company that makes billions of dollars by changing maps, guns, and adding an attachment every game. That takes a month, tops.

    3. No, because balance isn't something that can have multiple definitions. Balance is in numbers. Numbers dont sway one way or the other. There is right, and there is wrong. This isn't English class.

    4. Point being...?



    1.) wrong it is not a fact that the game is unbalanced. That is your view and your view does not make it a fact and never did. Those that cry and say it is unbalanced are just those that refuse to adapt or change what they feel is fair or balanced. They expect all games to be what they want them to be. So any game that is not they call unbalanced, unfair, unequal and then cry about it like you are doing.

    2.) wrong it takes many months to come up with the maps and test them and then to chose the weapons and test them on the maps. It is not something that is done quickly. You dont seem to get it and think they just throw these games togethere in short notice. It does not matter how much you paid for the game you are still not entitled to have it work just the way you want it to work. You paid for a product not the right to decide how that product should peform. You are entitled to express your view but it does not mean your view is correct, nor does it mean the devs have to listen to it or do anything about it.

    3. Can be swayed it is not definite or finite and never was in any game and never will be. You try to use numbers as your reasons but you forget to take into the different variables that affect how those numbers interact with each other and yes those variables must always be considered. If you can not understand that then you thinking is flawed and your logic is broken. Balance is not now nor ever been just numbers. mathmatical balance does not apply to a game where there are mutliple variables that can not be considered when trying to balance things against each other as you seem to wish to think.

    4.) Point being, no matter what you want it is ultimately up to the devs to decide if it is done or not, not you or anyone else. They have the final say on what is balanced or not and what will be changed or not. Not any of the players. So you may forever think the game is unbalanced but it does not mean they have to do a thing about it if they feel it has been balanced enough.

    They do not now nor ever have to try to keep all players happy, there will always be players like you that feel the game is not right or balanced or fair, but that does not mean they have to change it to suit you alone. Not even if you paid 200$ would they have to really care how much you didnt like it. the amount you paid for the game does not entitle your view to be any more important then anyone else.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    TheDeathlyAssassin
    Asasa don't even reply. These people are idiots that will never learn. It doesn't matter how many times you stomp their PATHETIC arguments. I'm not going to reply to them.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    TheDeathlyAssassin wrote:

     

    Asasa don't even reply. These people are idiots that will never learn. It doesn't matter how many times you stomp their PATHETIC arguments. I'm not going to reply to them.



    you want to see a pathetic argument? i present your groups:

    you know your argument is such and such is OP because it has better stats in all areas over such and such. we prove you wrong and you either A: ignore it completely. B: start insulting saying that the other guys are morons or dont know anything about balance and so on. OR C: sit there and say "Well... those dont count because I dont think they help... those advantages wont be noticed, its impossible for someone to notice the differences. You also seem to believe that anyone can do good with any gun, but No one can do horrible with such and such, its physically impossible to be better with the other because god himself came down from heaven and said "THO SHALT NOT DO HORRIBLE" and thus it was so...

    You want to argue that a Perk is overpowered yet dont take into account even a tenth of the actual situations that are likely to occur. You dont go beyond your LIMITED "simulation" of how the perk or gun is OP. By simulation i mean that your guys biggest point in the argument is that the perk gives an advantage in every situation. That is true if you are picking and choosing what to include in your test. Your guys view of the situation is so dam narrow its mind boggling, You only see one or two situations and claim thats what every gun battle is like. You dont even consider HOW the perk is being used other then a strait up shoot out because to consider that you have to talk about skill on some level, which for you guys is the forbidden.

    simply put you guys want "stat" balance, not game play balance, because to even start thinking about Game play balance you have to consider EVERYTHING about it, which clearly you guys refuse to do.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    nuttin2say

    Spur4 wrote:

     

    I don't understand why its such a bad thing to ask for more balance in a game. Gun's don't have to be the same to have balance either, so the lack of gun variety argument is null. -- The only way to bring more variety is to a) have more guns AND b) have EVERY gun perform significantly different, or c) reduce the number of guns in the game. Because there are people like you that have been demanding "balance" for so long, the Devs chose the easiest route by choosing to reduce the number of guns. That's the only way to ensure balance in a way you can understand: make sure every player is using the same gun. You're arguing that the guns do not have balance, meaning you feel they do not perform equally - because they have no variance in how they perform. That's an ILLOGICAL statement. It is not possible for there to be a lack of variety because there is too much variety. I.M.O, the more balance a game has, the more likely that gun variety will be high. -- You need to take some college courses dealing with mathematics. As soon as you throw "human" into the equation, you actually remove a variable. Statistically, there are colors that when surveying a population, are more popular than others. There are shapes, literally, that populations prefer over others. The end result is that if every gun performed exactly the same, meaning the only difference is the shape you see on the screen and the sound they make, there will still be certain guns used more than other guns.   I'm not a bad player at this game either, I do quite well using a wide variety of playstyles, guns, perks, etc. Its just that when I'm playing with, say, a PM63 I'll do good. But in the back of my mind, I know that I would have done even better with a Famas/Aug.  -- That's the whole point of having an inferior weapon: so that better players still feel challenged after 6 months of playing the game.

    Basically, what we have in this game is this;

    ---The best guns---
        +The best choice for playing good, can do everything that other guns can do, but better(Compare: Famas)

    The Devs do this so that people that have never played the game are attracted to the game and want to become a fan that buys the next release of the game. Remember, this is also a business venture. Thus, if my wife wants to play the game, she can actually make selections that give her a half-azzed chance of winning at the game at least some of the time. If the game was equal in every respect, "balanced" in the manner you're advocating, then far fewer people would play the game. This game requires CRITICAL THINKING ability. You might be Hulk Hogan as far as your physical abilities, but your reaction times alone, your endurance ability alone, does not promise you a victory. A kid in a wheel chair is just as likely to win against you as an NFL player. THAT is a balanced game.

    ---The middle class---
        +Has some similar traits with the best guns, but lacks in areas that the best guns still excel in(Compare Famas vs. PM63, PM63 has firerate but lacks damage, aim assist, attachments, mag size etc.)

    That makes no sense to me whatsoever. "The middle class has some similar traits with the best guns but lacks in areas that the best guns still excel in ..." WTF? You're advocating that the guns in the game have greater variation. That's what variety means: greater differences between the individual parts/members. You cannot make a logical argument, you cannot make a valid argument when you advocate "There should be greater variety by making everything perform more alike." I cannot stress to you enough how utterly insane such an argument is.

    ---The worst of the worst---
        +These guns are unintended for regular gameplay, and perform poorly on almost every level.(Compare Famas vs. Uzi, Uzi has more recoil, less damage, less aim assist, attachments, etc.)  - Really, guy? This is THE problem with the case your side of the argument makes. The Uzi is meant to perform significantly different than the Famas. The only way to adjust the game to the logic of the case you make here is to adjust the Famas so that Sniper rifles do not have an advantage over the Famas. Then you have to adjust the Uzi so that the Famas does not have an advantage over it. The end result is that Sniper rifles and Uzis are equally effective in every situation.



    I would really love to know the demographics of both sides of this argument as far as education and age go.

    I'm pretty sure I could make a very accurate guess: under 25 years of age and high school or less.

    I'm not knocking you if that's the case. I'm just trying to explain to you that there is far more thought placed into the things you people are complaining about than you think. Tired or Trial, one of the two, already explained that.

    Look, whether or not your argument is valid does not matter. The audience listening to the argument has to be convinced. The audience you're argument is aimed at?

    Those guys have some of the best college education in the US and beyond. You'll NEVER convince them that "more variety = less differences = balance." Okay?

    Finally, Activision is trying to bring "balance" to the COD games as you guys are definining it. This is evidenced in the increasingly dumbed down characteristics of the game. MW2 attempted to do this by bringing in the Nuke. You say that was OP, but the problem was that a lot of good players were complaining that it was not fair that they get stuck on a team of randoms that were poor players. The result was a weapon/kill streak that would allow a really good player to win the match ... even if his teammates were a bunch of idiots. WaW demonstrated that the community often doesn't know anything at all about creating a good, fun, exciting game. The community was raging for vehicles. Think you'll ever see another permanent, in-game vehicle that does not require a kill streak in a COD title again? Not likely. And with BO the game's balance was shifted to poorer players by removing the ability to kill streak chain (kills by kill streaks count toward higher kill streaks - that was removed from the game) because people felt it was OP. However, there are still people crying about kill streaks being OP. The end result is that in MW3 we have 3 strike packages that are, frankly heavily weighted in favor of poorer players. The Specialist Package, they even said so, is aimed at players that can run up high kill counts without the aid of kill streaks. However, it only enhances the players skill - it does nothing to make a direct impact on kill count. The Support Package does nothing but give players that get killed 50 times in a match a glorified Juggernaut. The Assault Package, if you really want to go out on a limb, enables players that rely on kill streak kills to rack up kills. I don't and most good players don't rely on those and never have.

    In any case, this game is being dumbed down because of arguments like you guys are making.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    deamonomic

    nuttin2say wrote:

     

    Spur4 wrote:

     

    I don't understand why its such a bad thing to ask for more balance in a game. Gun's don't have to be the same to have balance either, so the lack of gun variety argument is null. -- The only way to bring more variety is to a) have more guns AND b) have EVERY gun perform significantly different, or c) reduce the number of guns in the game. Because there are people like you that have been demanding "balance" for so long, the Devs chose the easiest route by choosing to reduce the number of guns. That's the only way to ensure balance in a way you can understand: make sure every player is using the same gun. You're arguing that the guns do not have balance, meaning you feel they do not perform equally - because they have no variance in how they perform. That's an ILLOGICAL statement. It is not possible for there to be a lack of variety because there is too much variety. I.M.O, the more balance a game has, the more likely that gun variety will be high. -- You need to take some college courses dealing with mathematics. As soon as you throw "human" into the equation, you actually remove a variable. Statistically, there are colors that when surveying a population, are more popular than others. There are shapes, literally, that populations prefer over others. The end result is that if every gun performed exactly the same, meaning the only difference is the shape you see on the screen and the sound they make, there will still be certain guns used more than other guns.   I'm not a bad player at this game either, I do quite well using a wide variety of playstyles, guns, perks, etc. Its just that when I'm playing with, say, a PM63 I'll do good. But in the back of my mind, I know that I would have done even better with a Famas/Aug.  -- That's the whole point of having an inferior weapon: so that better players still feel challenged after 6 months of playing the game.

    Basically, what we have in this game is this;

    ---The best guns---
        +The best choice for playing good, can do everything that other guns can do, but better(Compare: Famas)

    The Devs do this so that people that have never played the game are attracted to the game and want to become a fan that buys the next release of the game. Remember, this is also a business venture. Thus, if my wife wants to play the game, she can actually make selections that give her a half-azzed chance of winning at the game at least some of the time. If the game was equal in every respect, "balanced" in the manner you're advocating, then far fewer people would play the game. This game requires CRITICAL THINKING ability. You might be Hulk Hogan as far as your physical abilities, but your reaction times alone, your endurance ability alone, does not promise you a victory. A kid in a wheel chair is just as likely to win against you as an NFL player. THAT is a balanced game.

    ---The middle class---
        +Has some similar traits with the best guns, but lacks in areas that the best guns still excel in(Compare Famas vs. PM63, PM63 has firerate but lacks damage, aim assist, attachments, mag size etc.)

    That makes no sense to me whatsoever. "The middle class has some similar traits with the best guns but lacks in areas that the best guns still excel in ..." WTF? You're advocating that the guns in the game have greater variation. That's what variety means: greater differences between the individual parts/members. You cannot make a logical argument, you cannot make a valid argument when you advocate "There should be greater variety by making everything perform more alike." I cannot stress to you enough how utterly insane such an argument is.

    ---The worst of the worst---
        +These guns are unintended for regular gameplay, and perform poorly on almost every level.(Compare Famas vs. Uzi, Uzi has more recoil, less damage, less aim assist, attachments, etc.)  - Really, guy? This is THE problem with the case your side of the argument makes. The Uzi is meant to perform significantly different than the Famas. The only way to adjust the game to the logic of the case you make here is to adjust the Famas so that Sniper rifles do not have an advantage over the Famas. Then you have to adjust the Uzi so that the Famas does not have an advantage over it. The end result is that Sniper rifles and Uzis are equally effective in every situation.



    I would really love to know the demographics of both sides of this argument as far as education and age go.

    I'm pretty sure I could make a very accurate guess: under 25 years of age and high school or less.

    I'm not knocking you if that's the case. I'm just trying to explain to you that there is far more thought placed into the things you people are complaining about than you think. Tired or Trial, one of the two, already explained that.

    Look, whether or not your argument is valid does not matter. The audience listening to the argument has to be convinced. The audience you're argument is aimed at?

    Those guys have some of the best college education in the US and beyond. You'll NEVER convince them that "more variety = less differences = balance." Okay?

    Finally, Activision is trying to bring "balance" to the COD games as you guys are definining it. This is evidenced in the increasingly dumbed down characteristics of the game. MW2 attempted to do this by bringing in the Nuke. You say that was OP, but the problem was that a lot of good players were complaining that it was not fair that they get stuck on a team of randoms that were poor players. The result was a weapon/kill streak that would allow a really good player to win the match ... even if his teammates were a bunch of idiots. WaW demonstrated that the community often doesn't know anything at all about creating a good, fun, exciting game. The community was raging for vehicles. Think you'll ever see another permanent, in-game vehicle that does not require a kill streak in a COD title again? Not likely. And with BO the game's balance was shifted to poorer players by removing the ability to kill streak chain (kills by kill streaks count toward higher kill streaks - that was removed from the game) because people felt it was OP. However, there are still people crying about kill streaks being OP. The end result is that in MW3 we have 3 strike packages that are, frankly heavily weighted in favor of poorer players. The Specialist Package, they even said so, is aimed at players that can run up high kill counts without the aid of kill streaks. However, it only enhances the players skill - it does nothing to make a direct impact on kill count. The Support Package does nothing but give players that get killed 50 times in a match a glorified Juggernaut. The Assault Package, if you really want to go out on a limb, enables players that rely on kill streak kills to rack up kills. I don't and most good players don't rely on those and never have.

    In any case, this game is being dumbed down because of arguments like you guys are making.

     
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    Snipingdbag
    As a former number 1 in the world leaderboards in an online ps2 game back in 2006, I feel my opinions, should be seen as facts or at the very least very believe “theories.”

    The FamasAug needs an actual Nerf. Thus a nerf in Fire rate or Damage. With that nerf it will stay an Easy mode automatic AR, like the Galil, 47 & commando are atm, just more balanced game wise. Atm it’s basically the best SMG and Ar in one. Why give an ar, the section that is the easiest to use to begin with that kind of fire rate in combo with that power and easy recoil? The FamasAug would be balanced as burst fire guns or with lower damage or fire rate. As “they” are no fckin way.

    Go online now, see the combat records of 0 to 100 people, how many of those people have Top guns include a shotgun (excluding the Spaz, not that it matters much), a sniper, lmg or one of the 20 clip smgs or hell 4 hit kill smgs? Indeed. If shotguns are primaries they need more attachments, most of the problems with them are simply lag from my experience though, good multiple attachments would help. The Olympia would be one of my most used guns with a speed reloaded attachment.

    If the mac11 killed in 3 bullets cqb to the range the scorpion kills in 2 (without rf on) and if FamasAug had an acceptable fire rate (not 25 % faster than the 40 damage ar clones, but around 12.5 % faster) there would be Good balance, as it wouldn't be too good a hybrid ar / smg then. Yet in this game the FamasAug kills in 3 to 5 bullets constantly with ar range, smg fire rate and with Easy mode recoil. No reason to use the mac11 or any other “underpowered” 4 hit kill smg at all.

    By giving smg / ars more fire rate rating than basically 3 (with rf, excluding semi autos & burst fire ars) there would be less smg / ar clones and more diversity, as long as the fire rate rating don’t have a 25 % spread with Easier to control recoil with basically the same damage, like the FamasAug has now. Balance & diversity.

    A FamasAug Shouldn’t be the better option cqb to any smgs. There lies the problem. Ars are already the easiest class to use, this won’t change with an actually nerf, just make the game better all-round. I know how to “adapt,” my top 5 guns include the Famas “&” Aug for obvious reasons. I’m not whining because it kills me (I have 2 to 3 times the amount of kills people have on me with them), I’m “whining” because there is no balance there at all or actual diversity In this game. Why should I use the MPL for instance on nuketown when the FamasAus is more reliable cqb and gives me easy kills longer up the field as well?

    Give the FamasAug an acceptable fire rate (say 12.5 % faster instead of 25 % faster than the 40 damage auto ar clones or lower the Centerspeeds to 1400 at least). You could even give it 30 damage per bullet. Let’s see how much people will keep on using it as a 4 hit kill gun, which according to you people is balance, since there apparently is already balance with how the mac, uzi, mpl ect work as 4 hit kill weapons in their fckin comfort zone.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    NIGHTMARE-1000
    Honestly some idiots don't know what guns are good and what guns are bad. A while ago there were complaints that the RPK is UP, that's simply b******t. Sure the HK may have less recoil but the RPK holds 10 more rounds in a mag(20 with ext), has a higher fire rate and has a smaller hip fire spread, they just didn't realise that the RPK was an LMG made for closer range fighting.
  • Re: Op vs Up vs Nerf vs Buff
    atiredoldguy
    @snipingdbag

    Congrats that you were tops on the leaderbopards at one time. Myself, the best I've accomplished was breaking the 1000 mark in the world for WaW hc ffa. I would have to say at best I am a slightly above average player, and that may be bragging a bit. So while you may be considering your opinion as fact because of your skill, I'm stressing my opinion as an average player.

    But if what you are saying is fact ... then that means I should ....... or everbody should ..... do better when using the famas than other weapons. But I have done what you suggested ...... I've examined the combat records of countless players. For a while I was checking 15 - 20 different players every day.

    I would check records of everyone in each match from the best players to the worst .. all of them.
    I made sure that I took the majority of the games I went through were core mode, but included some hc too, you do have to give hc players some inclusion. I went by k/d. Sure, many had more kills with certain weapons , but if they died more overall with that weapon, you cant say it is best.

    What I found was that the numbers on performance didnt favor the famas at all.  On average, the famas was the 8th best performing weapon. Nearly everyone had a couple ars, a couple smgs, and usually at least one shotgun that they did better with. Even people who claimed they were arguing as a famas user that they got so many more kills with it , blah blah .... it was seldom in their top 5 ranking weapons. Myself ....... the famas is ( or at least was ) my 23rd best performing weapon.

    The one key here was that while most had other weapons in their top ... they varied. ( actually, the commando came in top more than any others) This backs up my claim that its not just the stats on a weapon that counts but how it performs for each individual. If instead of looking at stats and drawing a conclusion, people would experiment a little and see what weapon works best for them they wouldnt have the issues they do.

    The famas is indeed a nice multipurpose weapon, and I'd have to say that its necessary to have that for newcomers. (keep in mind though that the famas didnt rank in the top for them either) But the major part of getting better in a game is getting the feel of different weapons, and it seems that there are plenty of weapons that are easier to get better with than the famas. Put it this way ..... If we were going by test grades ....... anyone could pick up a famas and get a high c or low b. But continued use of the famas would only yield maybe a mid to high b. But using a weapon by what feels right, a person might start out with a d ...... but move up easily to a high b or a



    If there is anything that showed off balance, I'd have to agree it would be the sniper rifles. Sniper rifles were rarely in the top for performaance. I can see why the devs did this after all the complaints and hype over qsing. But even those, if a person works at it they can do better.

    Shotguns ... that was questionable. The spas ranked better than the famas, but not by much and the others were hit and miss.

    lmgs .......... the stoner came in above the famas. And again, the others were hit and miss. The m60 did well but it was well below the famas.



    But all in all .......... while the ars and smg ruled the performance ranks........ I think that there is way more thought and detail put into balancing the game than most people even care to look at. Are the weapons perfectly balanced ?...... No.

    But weapons dont play the game ..... weapons dont buy the game....... people do. And people are not balanced. No 2 players are identical, and there are more variables when it comes to people than one could count. But when it comes to balancing people and weapons, I have to give the developers credit for doing a pretty good job at making a game that suits everybody , and gives everybody an equal chance...... that's balance.